Munshi Lal Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.16007 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -30 Year- 2014 Thana -RAGHOPUR District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ======================================================

1. Munshi Lal Prasad son of Tribeni Prasad resident of village Mohsinpur Kelvaraya, P.S. Khusrupur, District Patna.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajendra Kishore Prasad Mr. Rekha Prasad Mr. Rohit Kishore Prasad For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Lalan Kumar (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 26-08-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner is languishing in custody since 19.06.2014 in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120 (B) of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case is that on 23.4.2014, the son of the informants Munna Kumar (deceased) was taken to the Sasural of son of his saru after closing his shop by the petitioner. When petitioner returned at home, the daughter of petitioner asked him about Munna Kumar (deceased) but the petitioner feigned ignorance and co-accused Lalu Prasad told that Munna Kumar (deceased) went where he had to go. The informant suspected that

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.16007 of 2015 (4) dt.26-08-2015 2/2 co-accused Rama Shankar Singh, Ramanand Singh, Dayanand Singh, who were informant's brother, have hand in the commission of murder,with whom he has got land dispute and the informant suspected that petitioner along with Rajdeo Kumar, Pramod Kumar, Amod Kumar, Ranjit Kumar, Janardan Kumar, Mohan Kumar, Sanjeet Kumar also helped the petitioner. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is some previous land rivalry between the informant and the petitioner for which a complaint case has been filed by the petitioner against the informant and others. Be that as it may, the allegation against the petitioner is that he had taken Munna Kumar (deceased) along with him and he was last seen with the deceased. His complicity in the alleged occurrence has been further elaborated in the various paras of the case diary by the witnesses, hence, I am not inclined to grant privilege of bail to the petitioner and the prayer for bail is, accordingly, rejected.

(Nilu Agrawal, J) Sudha/- U